Reliable Multicast Transport Building Block: Tree Auto-Configuration
draft-sjkoh-rmt-bb-tree-config-03
Yes
No Objection
(David Kessens)
(Margaret Cullen)
(Ted Hardie)
No Record
Deb Cooley
Erik Kline
Francesca Palombini
Gunter Van de Velde
Jim Guichard
John Scudder
Mahesh Jethanandani
Murray Kucherawy
Orie Steele
Paul Wouters
Roman Danyliw
Warren Kumari
Zaheduzzaman Sarker
Éric Vyncke
Summary: Needs a YES.
Deb Cooley
No Record
Erik Kline
No Record
Francesca Palombini
No Record
Gunter Van de Velde
No Record
Jim Guichard
No Record
John Scudder
No Record
Mahesh Jethanandani
No Record
Murray Kucherawy
No Record
Orie Steele
No Record
Paul Wouters
No Record
Roman Danyliw
No Record
Warren Kumari
No Record
Zaheduzzaman Sarker
No Record
Éric Vyncke
No Record
Allison Mankin Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(2004-03-25)
Unknown
Email from one of the WG Chairs: Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 17:00:03 PST To: Allison Mankin <mankin@psg.com> cc: rogerkermode@msn.com From: Lorenzo Vicisano <lorenzo@cisco.com> Subject: Re: Time-Sensitive: RFC Editor publishing TRACK bbs Allison, My major concern about these publications are that these documents contains all RMT boiler-plate info and plenty of reference to the RMT work and documents. All this makes these docs. quite indistinguishable from the rest of our publications.. In addition to this, I'm suspecting that these are candidates for experimental status .. which is exactly the status of the WG documents.. This could create a lot of confusion. I'm wondering if this could be a case similar to the second example in section 5 draft-iesg-rfced-documents-00.txt. thanks, Lorenzo
David Kessens Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Harald Alvestrand Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2005-02-17)
Unknown
Note: I have no objection to either sending a DNP until they are cleaned up or sending a "no problem - please clean them up". Gen-ART review on the documents (critical) is sent to the RFC Editor independently, and also recorded in the comment logs.
Margaret Cullen Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Russ Housley Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2005-02-16)
Unknown
Not an end run around any WG in the Security Area, but the document claims to be associated with a WG. The RFC Editor needs to remove the text that claim affiliation with the RMT working group.
Steven Bellovin Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2004-04-01)
Unknown
I am very concerned about how close these are to an end run of the WG. Much of the security considerations section boils down to "just use IPsec" -- and use it with preshared keys, which seems really dubious here.
Ted Hardie Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown